Responsa for Menachot 84:14
רבי יוחנן בן דהבאי אומר אפילו מראה שני שבה כשר משום שנאמר (ויקרא יד, ד) ושני תולעת
So R'Hanina B'Gamaliel. But R'Johanan B'Dahabai says, Even the second dyeing<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., even though something else has already been dyed with this dye. ,gku, hba ,gku, hba');"><sup>22</sup></span> is valid, for it says, And scarlet.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XIV, 4. Heb. is interpreted as 'the second use of the scarlet dye'. And so it is too with the blue dye.');"><sup>23</sup></span>
Noda BiYhudah I
It is apparent that Rashi unquestionably intended when he wrote ‘covered the t’fillin in gold’ meant that the boxes themselves were made of gold, and he coated the scriptural verses in gold. It is those verses which Rashi calls ‘tefillin’, which is identified in the companion33Lit. ‘and his friend will say this about him’ (next) text which disqualifies the use of an impure animal. Rashi explained that it applies toone who made the phylactery boxes from an impure animal. If that is so, then when he (Rashi) states “coated in gold”, it means the actual boxes
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy